1. Reminder: Please user our affiliate links to get to your favorite stores for holiday shopping!

Bought the 12-40: what do I sell (if anything!)

Discussion in 'This or That? (MFT only)' started by BigTam, Jan 7, 2014.

  1. BigTam

    BigTam Mu-43 Top Veteran

    772
    Mar 19, 2012
    Dortmund, Germany
    Ron
    I'm sure the fine forum members can help me a little here. I bought a 12-40 (separated from the E-M1 kit) and I'm thinking of thinning my lens selection. I currently have the following lenses for my E-M5:

    1. 9-18 - I like wide, so it will stay until an 8,9 or 10mm prime comes along.
    2. 17 1.8 - my 'default' lens, since I like the 35mm-e Field of view. But I also have an X100, same FOV, which is almost as fast (f2).
    3. 45 1.8 - mostly for portraits
    4. 40-150 - cheap, and good enough for my rare zoo shots and such
    5. 75 - definitely stays

    I shoot landscapes, cities, churches and sometimes fast-moving grandchildren. To help finance the new lens, what would you do?

    My thoughts:

    * The 9-18 stays, as 12mm isn't wide enough (I tested the 12mm prime).

    * The 17 could go, as it seems to be covered well enough by the 12-40 (I will test this when the 12-40 arrives). If 2.8 isn't enough (although I mostly shoot non-moving subjects, so a bit longer exposure isn't a huge deal), I have the X100.

    * The 45 could go, for portraits I have the 75. If I can't get back far enough indoors for the 75, I could just use the 12-40, maybe using flash to stop motion. Again, I'll test it against the 12-40 when it arrives.

    * The 40-150 could go, but it wouldn't fetch much money.

    What are your thoughts?
     
  2. Satanico

    Satanico New to Mu-43

    6
    May 3, 2012
    I'd only sell the 45mm.
    The 17 is your favorite lense right now and a lighter and smaller lense is always nice to have in addition to the massive zoom.
    The other lenses aren't affected by the 12-40mm.

    But maybe you could sell the x100 if you need the money.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. homerusan

    homerusan Mu-43 Regular

    130
    Dec 25, 2012
    izmir, TURKEY
    if i were you, i sell all of them but 75mm... you fell much relieved
    and wait for the olympus fast telezoom for ambush ;)
     
    • Like Like x 2
  4. alex66

    alex66 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    715
    Jul 23, 2010
    None of them if you have a use for them all, at least wait and see if one or two just get no use over a few months though you could exchange the 45mm for the PL 42.5mm :)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. hazwing

    hazwing Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 25, 2012
    Australia
    You've thought out the pro/cons pretty well... it just about making a decision.

    I'd ditch either the 17mm or the x100. Possibly the 45mm as well if you need the cash.

    Or if you can afford it, keep them all! The 12-40 will not give you the F1.8 from the 17mm and 45mm. I have the pana 12-35mm, but I have more fun using the 17/45 combo (so they all stay).
     
  6. jamespetts

    jamespetts Mu-43 Top Veteran

    802
    May 21, 2011
    London, England
    Why would you want to sell any of those things? None of them are significant overlaps and they all have their uses.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. BigTam

    BigTam Mu-43 Top Veteran

    772
    Mar 19, 2012
    Dortmund, Germany
    Ron
    True, but the money for the 12-40 leaves a hole in my wallet. And I prefer not to have too many lenses in the bag.
     
  8. BigTam

    BigTam Mu-43 Top Veteran

    772
    Mar 19, 2012
    Dortmund, Germany
    Ron
    :biggrin:
     
  9. BigTam

    BigTam Mu-43 Top Veteran

    772
    Mar 19, 2012
    Dortmund, Germany
    Ron
    Good idea: I think I would prefer to keep the X100 instead of the 17. Sometimes I like to just take the X100 in a small belt pouch, smaller than the M5+17 combination.
     
  10. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    Honestly, keep it a little and then figure out if you'll actually use the 17/1.8 or the 45/1.8; the speed and thus DoF difference is significant, but the size is a bigger issue. Sometimes I like zooms (travel), sometimes I prefer primes (when it's dark). So I have a good complement of both. Despite having the A7r as the 'mostly primes' camera, the IBIS sometimes makes the E-M1 the far better low-light camera for static subjects, ergo maintaining both primes and the zoom in MFT land.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. BigTam

    BigTam Mu-43 Top Veteran

    772
    Mar 19, 2012
    Dortmund, Germany
    Ron
    Good advice, Mattia. I suspect that if I want light and 35mm-e FOV, I'll take the X100, so the 17 looks vulnerable. As for the 45, it won't fetch too much, so I may keep it.
     
  12. dav1dz

    dav1dz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    926
    Nov 6, 2012
    Canada
    Oh man BigTam you hit a soft spot for me. When 12-35 came out I was very tempted to get it, then comes the 12-40, a range that is so useful, I've been trying to avoid going to camera stores.

    Out of your kit, I would save the 17/1.8 & 75/1.8. Sell the rest and get the Samyang/Rokinon/Bower 7.5 fisheye. I find my 9-18 being shot a lot on 12 mm these days. The 12-40 is definitely a better lens at 12-18 mm. That creates quite the overlap in my mind. 3 mm of usage for the 9-18 may not be worth having an investment of $500+, and perhaps a cheaper fisheye can be used and defished if wider than 12 mm is required.

    I've been missing f/1.4 a lot lately. Should not have sold the PL 25/1.4. If I was to take the plunge and get a fast midrange zoom (12-35 OR 12-40), I would probably sell everything else and pickup another 25/1.4. It will be a 2-lens kit that I'm confident with.

    Anyhow, those are my minimalist 2 cents.
     
  13. BigTam

    BigTam Mu-43 Top Veteran

    772
    Mar 19, 2012
    Dortmund, Germany
    Ron
    Thanks for your thoughts, David. I did have the Samyang 7.5 (and the Panasonic 7-14) at one time, and it's fun, but the whole defish thing was very unsatisfactory for me. And I shoot the 9-18 at 9 or 10 most of the time. However, I could resort to stitching 2 or 3 12mm shots ... hmm.

    Frankly, the combination of the 12-40 and the 75 gets more appealing all the time. Would probably fit in my Hadley Digital.
     
  14. Stefan_SS

    Stefan_SS Mu-43 Regular

    52
    Dec 9, 2013
    Hi!

    I understand exactly how you feel, I bought the kit with the EM-1 and the 12 - 40 lens. It is an Amazing lens that behaves very well optically. It is however a bit on the Heavy side. Before you start selling off your lenses (with a loss I might add) you really need to see how you´re using your gear after the zoom arrives. It might turn out that you prefer having the 17,5 lens on as a standard lens even after you started using the zoom. I still have the Panasonic 20 mm F1.7 as my default lens, had the Olympus 17,5 mm existed when I bought it I would probably have gotten that instead but I´m pleased enough with the 20 mm lens to keep it.
    Mind you, the weight of just the 12 - 40 lens is 382 grams, about the same as the first Three lenses on your list together that Clock in on 391 grams. Personally I might actually prefer having Three separate lenses if I was shooting 60 % or more with the 17 mm lens on the camera as it would keep the camera as light as possible. As you might have guessed, weight is a big concern for me. It was the main reason I sold off all my canongear after I had owned the EM-5 for six months. It's your call.
    After a small bit of bad luck my 12 - 40 lens broke and I had to send it to Olympus, during this month without it I have come to realize that I shot over 70 % of my Pictures during the holidays with the Panasonic 20mm, the rest I shot with the 75 mm lens that I like really much. I did not use my 45 mm at all! In fact, it´s my least used lens of all. This last month during familiy dinnerparties, naturewalks, nightshooting fireworks and just toying around with the features of the EM-1 I actually only used these two lenses.

    Why don't you take a step back, so to speak, and Watch your absolute favourite Pictures from last year, or just the 100 best of the bunch, and sort them by lens used. I will be enlightening. I made a smart search in lightroom and was surprised myself...



    Cheers!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. bikerhiker

    bikerhiker Mu-43 All-Pro

    Dec 24, 2013
    Canada
    David
    Primes are good for low light photography and if that is important to you, I would keep the primes, because if you want to change focal lengths you can always move closer or further yourself because the primes allow you to use lower ISOs and thus better noise control and better depth separation.

    Zooms are good for indoors as well, but you need to use a higher ISO setting which then can do not so nice things on the shadow areas again in low light.

    The only one to go is the 40-150, because you already have a 75 prime anyhow.

    If you want to forgo the primes and you have an E-M1 or E-M5, then I would keep the 75 and the 12-40 and sell the rest.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. BigTam

    BigTam Mu-43 Top Veteran

    772
    Mar 19, 2012
    Dortmund, Germany
    Ron
    Agreed, but most of my low light is in church interiors and the like: my mini tripod works wonders ...

    However, I do like the discipline that primes impose. I think I'll keep them all for now and analyse my EXIFs after three months or so. The lenses I don't use will then go.
     
  17. BigTam

    BigTam Mu-43 Top Veteran

    772
    Mar 19, 2012
    Dortmund, Germany
    Ron
    The 12-40 has arrived, and I've done some quick tests. Set up a tripod, used a 2s delay, ISO 200, looked at the OOC JPGS. I'm not a fanatical pixel-peeper, but my conclusions were:

    1. The 12-40 is superior to the 9-18 at 12mm, especially at the edges and corners. Since I still need the 9mm FOV, I may try some stitching with the 12-40, but I think the 9-18 stays until there is a wider prime than the 12mm.

    2. The 12-40 is superior to the 17mm. The only reason to keep hte 17 would be the larger aperture (and, of course, size and weight). Since I feel happy with the E-M5 at higher ISOs, and can use my Metz 44 flash indoors usually, I think the 17mm will find a new home.

    3. The 45 is sharper than the 12-40 at 40mm. Since I wouldn't get much for it anyway, it stays.

    My eyes are oldish, and my colour perception has never been stellar, so your views may differ ...

    And I think I'll do a test against the X100 :)

    Many thanks for all your input!
     
  18. rklepper

    rklepper Mu-43 Top Veteran

    733
    Dec 19, 2012
    Iowa, USA
    Robert
    Two questions will determine what you do.

    1) Do you need the money from the sale of these items?

    2) Which do you use the least?

    The answer to question 1 will drive whether you need to answer the second and if the answer to 1 is yes, then 2 will tell you which to sell.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. BigTam

    BigTam Mu-43 Top Veteran

    772
    Mar 19, 2012
    Dortmund, Germany
    Ron
    Excellent logic: I don't need the money, as in, I won't eat tomorrow if I don't sell a lens. But I do have other things I could do with the money.

    After some preliminary testing (see above), I'll keep them all for a month or two, then decide.

    At the moment, the 17 1.8's coat is on a shoogly peg, as we say in Scotland :)
     
  20. rogergu

    rogergu Mu-43 Regular

    94
    Feb 11, 2013
    3, 4, 1 is my order.